X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at gag.com Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 12:46:58 -0600 User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: <89E39D8F-0776-4E91-A133-3D431FD4047E@noqsi.com> References: <20180723152807 DOT 13d27cadcd023b63aa3fd9c0 AT gmail DOT com> <20180723174658 DOT 32979841DEBA AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se> <20180723195942 DOT 605CB841DEBA AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se> <20180724132731 DOT 76074841DEBC AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se> <20180724161712 DOT f0082dda1044e41179fa82f0 AT gmail DOT com> <20180724145644 DOT 122BA841DEC5 AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se>

<89E39D8F-0776-4E91-A133-3D431FD4047E AT noqsi DOT com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----AHXN7P4QFVAVR49T2B8WXSC4MTLPPE" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [geda-user] Re: Project file To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com, John Doty From: Bdale Garbee Message-ID: <3C9CD694-1CBD-42CF-8991-5E3EEF582B0B@gag.com> Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk ------AHXN7P4QFVAVR49T2B8WXSC4MTLPPE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ok=2E I also design things that go to space, but I think about this differ= ently in that if the boards aren't using the same parts, I don't even want = to pretend they're the same=2E And I use light symbols for almost everything in a schematic and do late b= inding of everything but footprint and value, so I suspect we'd get along f= ine working together once we agreed on a vocabulary and workflow for the ta= sks at hand=2E=2E=2E ;-) Bdale On July 25, 2018 11:46:22 AM MDT, John Doty wrote: > >> On Jul 25, 2018, at 1:18 PM, Bdale Garbee wrote: >>=20 >> I'm curious about this too, because I work really hard to not have >anything change at this level between prototype and production, myself=E2= =80=A6 > >When you=E2=80=99re designing stuff to go into space, prototype parts hav= e to >be things you can acquire without too much delay=2E Production parts >often have to be blessed by the shamans=2E These are incompatible >requirements=2E > >I=E2=80=99ve worked on missions where we were allowed to tell the shamans= to go >away and leave us alone, and the resulting electronics worked fine in >space=2E Production boards were identical to prototype boards, but with >more care in inspection and testing=2E Saved time, mass, and of course >money=2E The spectacularly successful HETE-2 was largely constructed of >prototype boards upgraded to flight status through inspection and >testing after the failure of HETE-1=E2=80=99s launch vehicle=2E But the s= hamans >don=E2=80=99t want to hear things like this=2E > >>=20 >> Bdale >>=20 >> On July 25, 2018 10:34:46 AM MDT, Roland Lutz >wrote: >> On Tue, 24 Jul 2018, John Doty wrote: >> You may have different symbol libraries for prototype and >production=2E >>=20 >> How would these symbols be different: in top-level attributes, in pin > >> attributes, in pin geometry, or in graphical design? >>=20 >>=20 >> --=20 >> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail=2E Please excuse my brevity= =2E > >John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd=2E >http://www=2Enoqsi=2Ecom/ >jpd AT noqsi=2Ecom --=20 Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail=2E Please excuse my brevity=2E ------AHXN7P4QFVAVR49T2B8WXSC4MTLPPE Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ok=2E I also desi= gn things that go to space, but I think about this differently in that if t= he boards aren't using the same parts, I don't even want to pretend= they're the same=2E

And I use light symbols for almost everything in a schematic and do late b= inding of everything but footprint and value, so I suspect we'd get alo= ng fine working together once we agreed on a vocabulary and workflow for th= e tasks at hand=2E=2E=2E ;-)

Bdale

On July 25, 2018 11:46:22 AM MDT, = John Doty <jpd AT noqsi=2Ecom> wrote:

O= n Jul 25, 2018, at 1:18 PM, Bdale Garbee <bdale AT gag=2Ecom> wrote:

I'm curious about this too= , because I work really hard to not have anything change at this level betw= een prototype and production, myself=E2=80=A6
=
When you=E2=80=99re designing stuff to go into space, = prototype parts have to be things you can acquire without too much delay=2E= Production parts often have to be blessed by the shamans=2E These are inco= mpatible requirements=2E

I=E2=80=99ve w= orked on missions where we were allowed to tell the shamans to go away and = leave us alone, and the resulting electronics worked fine in space=2E Produ= ction boards were identical to prototype boards, but with more care in insp= ection and testing=2E Saved time, mass, and of course money=2E The spectacu= larly successful HETE-2 was largely constructed of prototype boards upgrade= d to flight status through inspection and testing after the failure of HETE= -1=E2=80=99s launch vehicle=2E But the shamans don=E2=80=99t want to hear t= hings like this=2E
Bdale
On July 25, = 2018 10:34:46 AM MDT, Roland Lutz <rlutz AT hedmen=2Eorg> wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jul 2018, John Doty wrote:
=
 You may have different sy=
mbol libraries for prototype and production=2E
<=
br class=3D"">How would these symbols be different: in top-level attributes=
, in pin 
attributes, in pin geometry, or in graphical design=
?
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail=2E Please excuse my brevity=2E
John Doty = Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd=2E
http://www=2Enoqsi=2Ecom/
jpd AT noqsi=2Ecom

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail=2E Please excuse my brevity=2E ------AHXN7P4QFVAVR49T2B8WXSC4MTLPPE--